This one time, at band camp, Craig Small said:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 10:28:07PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote:
> > I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> > program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> > looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't p
This one time, at band camp, Colin Watson said:
> "Should" just means that the package won't be thrown out of the
> distribution if it isn't fixed, unlike "must". It doesn't necessarily
> mean that it's OK to ignore it. Certainly, I think people ought to have
> a very good reason to ignore "should"
This one time, at band camp, Craig Small said:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 10:28:07PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote:
> > I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> > program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> > looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't p
This one time, at band camp, Colin Watson said:
> "Should" just means that the package won't be thrown out of the
> distribution if it isn't fixed, unlike "must". It doesn't necessarily
> mean that it's OK to ignore it. Certainly, I think people ought to have
> a very good reason to ignore "should"
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 10:28:07PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote:
> I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't parse this - this in
> itself trivial to work around, bu
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 10:28:07PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote:
> I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't parse this - this in
> itself trivial to work around, bu
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:02:36AM -0500, Aaron Haviland wrote:
> Kenneth Pronovici said:
> > You might want to check policy before filing a bug:
> >
> >http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-versions.html
> >
> > As I read it, the relevant section is:
> >
> >The upstream_version may
> This is exactly why I asked - the real key word here is 'should'. It's
> not a must, but on the other hand, it's not unreasonable, either. I've
> written to upstream to begin talking with them about this and other
> issues, and who knows, maybe they'll want to go to a reasonable version
> numbe
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:02:36AM -0500, Aaron Haviland wrote:
> Kenneth Pronovici said:
> > You might want to check policy before filing a bug:
> >
> >http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-versions.html
> >
> > As I read it, the relevant section is:
> >
> >The upstream_version may
> This is exactly why I asked - the real key word here is 'should'. It's
> not a must, but on the other hand, it's not unreasonable, either. I've
> written to upstream to begin talking with them about this and other
> issues, and who knows, maybe they'll want to go to a reasonable version
> numbe
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 11:50:44PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Kenneth Pronovici said:
> > > I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> > > program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> > > looking like -DR7.10. dh_ma
Kenneth Pronovici said:
> > I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> > program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> > looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't parse this - this in
> > itself trivial to work around, but it made me stop and wonder i
This one time, at band camp, Kenneth Pronovici said:
> > I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> > program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> > looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't parse this - this in
> > itself trivial to work around, but
> I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't parse this - this in
> itself trivial to work around, but it made me stop and wonder if this
> is because the versioni
Hello all,
I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't parse this - this in
itself trivial to work around, but it made me stop and wonder if this
is because the versio
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 11:50:44PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Kenneth Pronovici said:
> > > I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> > > program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> > > looking like -DR7.10. dh_ma
Kenneth Pronovici said:
> > I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> > program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> > looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't parse this - this in
> > itself trivial to work around, but it made me stop and wonder i
This one time, at band camp, Kenneth Pronovici said:
> > I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> > program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> > looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't parse this - this in
> > itself trivial to work around, but
> I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't parse this - this in
> itself trivial to work around, but it made me stop and wonder if this
> is because the versioni
Hello all,
I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't parse this - this in
itself trivial to work around, but it made me stop and wonder if this
is because the versio
20 matches
Mail list logo
